Skip to main content

Full text of "[untitled] The Modern Language Journal, (1922-04-01), pages 406-408"

See other formats


Early Journal Content on JSTOR, Free to Anyone in the World 

This article is one of nearly 500,000 scholarly works digitized and made freely available to everyone in 
the world by JSTOR. 

Known as the Early Journal Content, this set of works include research articles, news, letters, and other 
writings published in more than 200 of the oldest leading academic journals. The works date from the 
mid-seventeenth to the early twentieth centuries. 

We encourage people to read and share the Early Journal Content openly and to tell others that this 
resource exists. People may post this content online or redistribute in any way for non-commercial 

Read more about Early Journal Content at 
journal-content . 

JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary source objects. JSTOR helps people 
discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content through a powerful research and teaching 
platform, and preserves this content for future generations. JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a not-for-profit 
organization that also includes Ithaka S+R and Portico. For more information about JSTOR, please 


1. Warn the public that a movement is on to discredit and 
eliminate modern languages from the high schools and interest 
them in discouraging such a course. 

2. State the practical and the disciplinary value of the modern 
language course. 

3. Show that since the close of the war modern languages 
have become an absolute necessity for the average educated person 
in order to intelligently follow the social, economic and political 
movements of the modern nations. 

4. Demonstrate by facts to superintendents and boards that 
modern languages are fully the equals in importance of other 
required subjects. 

No clever words or sophistry will convince our opponents; we 
must use plain language and sound arguments. As languages 
mean so much to us who teach them, we are called upon to educate 
the public and the superintendents to the necessity of our subject 
in the high school. I earnestly hope that each teacher will pledge 
himself to do his share to cooperate in a movement which will 
prove that languages have both practical and disciplinary value. 
In fine, whatever is to be done must be done now; spurred on 
by the worthy cause we must combat this vicious tendency which 
is dictated neither by high educational ideals nor by good judg- 

John M. Pittaro 
The Stuyvesant High School 
New York City 


York, AUyn and Bacon. 1921. 97 pp. +43 (Vocabulary). 

The "book aims to help students of French to overcome the 
difficulties which confront them when they try to acquire a correct 
pronunciation of that language." A chapter each is devoted to 
"What Phonetics Does," "Formation of the Mouth and Throat. 
Speech Sounds," "Vowel Sounds," "Consonants," "Daily Exer- 
cises," "Phonetic Transcription of French Stories." 

"What Phonetics Does" is an exposition of the advantages of 
the phonetic method in teaching pronunciation; the chapter 
entitled "Formation of the Mouth and Throat. Speech Sounds" 
is clear and free from unnecessary technical terms. The two fol- 


lowing chapters treating of the vowels and consonants are not so 
satisfactory. In a book intended for American students, the 
author has not always kept in mind the difficulties they encounter. 
For example "&", closed "eu," closed "o," closed "ou," are fre- 
quently faulty because of too great a separation of the teeth; on 
the contrary, the open vowels are often incorrect because the teeth 
are held too close together. One could have hoped for some indi- 
cation of the degree of the separation of the teeth in the produc- 
tion of the vowels. After giving practical directions for the 
lengthening of the consonants, the author neglects the fact that 
the semi-consonants are likewise lengthened and contents himself 
in the case of w with the statement that "This is practically the 
same consonant as in English" (p. 24). Again the directions for 
the production of "I"; "put your tongue a little farther back than 
for "6," or "Pronounce i-6-e-a-a-o-6-u, and notice: (1) that the 
tongue starts in the front of the mouth and is gradually drawn 
back" (p. 34) can tend only to cause the American to accentuate 
his common fault of holding the tongue too far away from the 
front teeth while pronouncing all of the front vowels. Singing 
each sound (p. 25) recommends itself as a practical device in over- 
coming the tendency of diphthongize the vowels, but the direction, 
"Say it (6) very slowly, so as to divide your diphthong into two 
parts" (p. 24) or "Most people pronounce the vowel (e) with two 
vowel sounds, that is with a diphthongal vowel, etc." would 
seem to indicate a misconception of the nature of the English 
diphthong as it does not consist of two vowel sounds only, but of 
a multiplicity of vowel sounds, since the positions of jaw and 
tongue are constantly shifting in its production. 

In the discussion of nasal vowels, the injunction "Do not let 
your tongue touch your palate at all. If you do, it will make 
the sound a consonant, not a vowel" is hardly practical because 
Americans knowing this still pronounce n, m, and ng, after nasal 
vowels and not just ng as one would seem obliged to infer from 
the discussion of nasal "a," p. 32. 

Descriptions of sound as "more hollow" (p. 23), "round" 
(p. 24), or "thick" (p. 47) are too vague to be of use in a phonetic 

"There is very little to be said about "f"; it is a voiceless 
consonant so pronounce it gently in French" (p. 44) or "This is the 
voiceless sh sound, usually spelled ch in French. Pronounce it 
less energetically than in English" (p. 44), is misleading. All 
consonants are pronounced more energetically in French than in 

As French "r's" differ from English "r" in that they are always 
distinctly pronounced" (p. 46), a Scotch "r" or any other variety 
of trilled English "r" should be satisfactory in French; but this is 
clearly not the case. 


The author has omitted all discussion of consonant groups, 
of division of syllables, of linking, of stress, of intonation. 

James L. Barker 
University of Utah 

LE FRANC AIS ET SA PATRIE, By L. Raymond Talbot. 
Benj. H. Sanborn and Co., 1920. 

Ever since this book made its appearance, nearly ten years 
ago, we have felt that it needed a thorough overhauling before it 
could be used as a "French" reader. We were, therefore, much 
interested when we read in a Newsletter sent out by the pub- 
lishers that "the very latest edition" was available. We sent 
a cheque for $1 .32 and received a copy which we read with eager 
curiosity. Our curiosity soon became amazement, and amaze- 
ment soon changed to something else and made us say a few things 
in French and a lot more in English which cannot be printed out 
of respect for the ladies. 

The "very latest edition" starts off with a map of the France of 
ten years ago, with Alsace-Lorraine a part of Germany, and page 
30, line 13, states that Strasbourg est une ville allemande. This, we 
thought, may stand d la rigueur; the author visited France ten 
years ago, conditions have changed since that time, he probably 
explains that in another part. We turned to a comparison of 
"the very latest edition" with the .fourth, dated 1913. We found 
the same number of pages, and the same pages beginning with the 
same words. We also found the same misprints. In both editions, 
on page 18, line 14 has eglise without an accent; page 16, 1. 22, 
has Champs Mlysies without a hyphen; page 59, 1. 10, spells Sldan 
for Sedan; both editions end page 50 with a recut that lacks a 
cedilla; both editions, on p. 139, 1. 21, and in the vocabulary, give 
passioniment instead of passionniment; both the fourth and "the 
very latest edition," p. 157, 1. 7, have hdchis with a circumflex 
that should not be there; in both editions the vocabulary, p. 260, 
lists the singular that which does not exist; in both editions, the 
same page 260 spells empacqueter with a superfluous c; in both 
editions page 274 lists mourrir for mourir. This seemed so strange 
that we thought for a moment that some office boy had made a 
mistake and sent us the old fourth edition when we had insisted 
on having for our money a copy of "the very latest." Alas! Even 
this comfort was to be denied us. For we finally discovered that 
what we had received really was the "very latest edition." After 
the preface, half a dozen lines branding the fourth as such have 
been omitted from "the very latest," and on the title page the date 
1920 leaves no doubt about this being a new "edition." The old 
plates apparently grind out the new copies. The foreman of the